Look, jacksul. In my opinion, you’re not only still ignoring Caine, you’re ignoring women, almost completely. Plenty of us told you how an “if” works when discussing a person’s rape, and Caine concurred. She was/is outraged that you were treating her as invisible, and by fuck, you still are.

In your apology, after everyone went off on you with the word “if” underlined, bolded, italicized, and written in caps, you write this to her:

If you thought I was trying to do any of those things then I apologize to you personally.

She did not accept your apology, jacksul, and you ignored that. Do you care? Since she wrote that in 418, do you know how many times you’ve spoken to her or mentioned her name?

None.

Your 465 had a paragraph about “what my comments meant or implied about rape.” You took Caine entirely out of it.

Your 468 swooped back to the neo-Nazi holocaust revisionist skeptic. You even put in parentheses that they are usually guys.

Your 475 mentioned TF, PZ, Michael Shermer, Carl Sagan, and Mr. Spock

Your 478 has you quote and talk to Strange Gods and Tony (to whom you had earlier offered a REAL apology without an “if” in sight: “I owe Tony the Queer Shoop an apology because he was trying to explain things to me and I didn’t take the time to read his comments carefully or look up his points. Tony: I’m sorry and I will look up the speakers that you referenced. Thank you again for your patience.”

Your 485 is about your inner certainty once again, and addressed to JAL. Tell me, jacksul. Is JAL a man or a woman? LykeX did ask why you focused on just the two of them.

I seriously don’t understand people like you jacksul. I’ve apologized to mannequins many times for running into them. Why is this so difficult?

I apologized 4 times today to various people. I can do it when I feel regret! But in this case I can’t apologize for my intent to cast doubt on a rape without lying. I never had any doubt about the rape and I never intended to cast any doubt on the rape. I can apologize for:

You could say “I’m sorry for not understanding basic English grammar and then insulting people with my piss-poor writing.”

You could say “I’m sorry for not having learned theory of mind well enough to understand that other people don’t know what I’m thinking and when I say words that indisputably mean ‘you might not have been raped’ I shouldn’t be bizarrely upset when people think that I may have meant ‘you might not have been raped.”

You could–and I know this is a bit wild, but hear me out–address these statements to the person you’ve offended. And if you’re just not comfortable talking to rape victims/survivors, well, that’s too fucking bad because you already are and avoiding Caine isn’t going to save you.

“I owe Tony the Queer ShoopCaine an apology because she was trying to explain things to me and I didn’t take the time to read his comments carefully or look up his pointsask her what she wanted to do about talking with me.TonyCaine: I’m sorry and I will look up the speakers that you referencednot presume to speak for you or ignore you. Thank you again for your patienceexplaining my harmful sentence structure. I will not use “if” in response to anyone’s rape again.”

Online in comments with words there’s no ambiguity or doubt about the fact you said, “If she was raped…”
That’s proof. That’s undeniable. Your “intent” in your “heart of hearts” bullshit is NOT able to be known to us except through words and your words prove your Nice Guy act is shit.

Obviously the intent matters. If they intended to accuse you of being fat then you will rightly be insulted. If they intend to compliment your hat then you wont be.

Ok. Let me try this again. Now that I’m done laughing my ass off on the floor of a dirty ass gay bar that’s showing fucking Dennis the Menace.

There is *no* way anyone can know what you *intended*. To do so, we would need to be able to read your mind. We cannot do that. No one can do that. All we can go by…all anyone can go by… are the words you type into this little box and hit “submit comment”. Once you do that, you will be judged by those words. If those words contradict what you meant (as IS the case with much of what you’ve written), that is YOUR fault. You should preview your comment to make sure that the words you’re going to post reflect your intent.

jacksul – for your information, Richard Dawkins has quite a problem – he’s a complete asshole when it comes to sexism. That’s widely known and a whole lot of people aren’t too pleased with his blatant sexism or his refusal to acknowledge it or his recent doubling down on his sexism. Ever hear of his Dear Muslima? Whether you have or you haven’t, attempting to make yourself seem all high and mighty by emulating him isn’t going to help you out, in general or in the specific.

It’s rather obvious you idolize him, but your idol has some very serious problems. He’s very privileged and he loves that privilege so much, he’s perfectly happy to dismiss the concerns of half the population without any thought whatsoever. Some hero you have there.

Now, I am going to attempt, once again, to make myself very clear: you did not apologize to me. Your “if she was raped” was not a poor choice of words, it was not the fault of sentence structure and it does not prove you are a skeptic of any kind. All it does is show that you have a bias – a bias towards a nasty flavour of sexism. Now, we are all sexist, that’s part and parcel of being born into our societies and culture. The trick is to be aware of it. You’re a pretty lousy fucking skeptic, with your craven heart, taking refuge in lies and attempted tricks. You refuse to turn any critical thought upon yourself, upon your own thought processes.

Also, as pointed out by Athyco, you ignore, completely, anyone who is obviously a woman. You’re also doing a good job of ignoring the men in this thread who talked about being raped. My guess here would be you think, whether consciously or not, that any man who is raped = a woman, so you ignore them. Why are you ignoring the women, jacksul? Why are you ignoring the men who were raped, jacksul? And no, I won’t buy your “I was shocked!” bullshit this time around. We’re talking, you’re refusing to listen. Willfully refusing.

As was also pointed out, you managed an actual apology to Tony. Me? Not so much. Why? Oh, you’re just being a good skeptic, right, by not accepting the fact of my rape. Because that’s what it’s all coming down to, jacksul. You’re excusing yourself on the most loathsome of grounds and dislocating a shoulder in your attempts to pat yourself on the back for it.

You are walking around with two fistfuls of ugly, jacksul, and you’re perfectly willing to punch people in the face with them, rape victims in particular. Your flat statement that you will continue to doubt any person’s rape says volumes about you, jacksul. So, at this point, I think you know what you can do with your IF, you cowardly liar.

We’re not going to be able to explain to him why “I feel sorry for you” is not an OK thing to say in response to “I’ve been raped”, are we?

Oh, do not get me started. Of course it isn’t okay and it seriously offended me, which I do believe I mentioned in no uncertain terms to jacksul earlier. However, it seems I am still the invisible rape victim and am not allowed to be a living, breathing, sentient being who has been taking part in this thread. Nope, not here.

There is *no* way anyone can know what you *intended*. To do so, we would need to be able to read your mind. We cannot do that. No one can do that. All we can go by…all anyone can go by… are the words you type into this little box and hit “submit comment”. Once you do that, you will be judged by those words. If those words contradict what you meant (as IS the case with much of what you’ve written), that is YOUR fault. You should preview your comment to make sure that the words you’re going to post reflect your intent.

But I can only assure you that my intent was not harmful. I can’t prove that, but since most of the people here don’t seem to care about intent, it seems to be a non issue. If there was an fMRI or some similar machine that I could strap into to prove my intent was innocent then I swear to you, I would do it gladly.

If evolution is true….
If the volcano is about to erupt…
If the hurricane becomes a superstorm…

Evolution, a volcano, and the hurricane don’t give a shit if you assign different levels of probability to their “veracity” or activity. Evolution will do what it does, and science will document it. The volcano will kill your ass dead when you decide that “if” means there’s no danger when there is. The superstorm means that riding it out in your Long Island home brings you grief. It’s all on you; your evaluation of ideas and events and things don’t affect them in the least. We’ll have sympathy for you in terms of natural disaster, of course. No one INTENDS to get crisped by lava or flooded out of a collapsing house.

But…To your child: If you didn’t do anything to him, why did he hit you? (You really think your child doesn’t understand that you have doubts about his story?)
To your boss: If you sent an email about the meeting, I didn’t see it. (Are you unchewed or still on the payroll?)

Are you a fucking moron!? You’re typing, so clearly you can read at a rudimentary level. Was Caine’s post at 520 somehow unclear when she said Now, I am going to attempt, once again, to make myself very clear: you did not apologize to me…As was also pointed out, you managed an actual apology to Tony. Me? Not so much. ”

Go step on a Lego and then take a swim in a Schistosoma infested pond you contemptible asswipe.

Jacksul:
Try this out:
“Caine, I am sorry for doubting that you were raped. I was wrong to use IF, because it implies that I doubted you.”
Do you see the difference between THAT and eveything you have said?

No it wasn’t! But I missed it. The posts are coming so fast this is becoming a full time job and I am missing many of them including this very important one! You want an apology? well I am sorry for missing this post. Really really sorry about that one. I must be a fucking moron as previously stated.

Caine:
I want to resolve this before I stop posting from exhaustion. My main reason for posting here, disgust over the failure of skeptics to resolve conflict, is solved. I was being idealistic in my assumptions. You also made a lot of claims in your last post which I read carefully. It seems we could spend many exchanges on the points where we disagree, but I don’t think that is a good idea either. The only issue remaining is my disrespecting you by making the false accusation that you lied about being raped. I don’t want to leave until I make amends for the crazy accusation that I seem to have made towards you. You said that it was not a poor choice of words, it was not the fault of sentence structure and it does not prove I am a skeptic of any kind. All it does is show that I have a bias. Well I may have a bias. I may be a lousy skeptic. I admit this as anybody should.

Now what, besides my many previous apologies, do you want from me? I want to make things right here. I really hoped that we could come together and be allies and maybe even friends eventually, but given your thoughts about Richard Dawkins who I do respect a great deal as an intellectual hero, that is sadly probably not possible. If anybody who respect Prof. Dawkins is a monster to you then fine. We can mutually excommunicate each other and be done with it. But I don’t want to do that. Given that we cannot agree on everything in life, I still want to come together on this issue. I apologized to you for casting doubt on the terrible crime that was done to you, intentionality aside. I don’t intend to do such a thing again to you or anybody else. I will try hard to make sure nobody feels that way again on my account.

Now I really want to know if you feel my apology is unsatisfactory and in what way. I will try to fix it with your indulgence.

“I apologized to you for casting doubt on the terrible crime that was done to you” > “I am sorry”

I’d say it is better. If you don’t think it is good enough review my many earlier apologies and pick one. If you want me to say, honestly: “Caine, I am sorry,” then I can say that. It’s not my style exactly but here we go. I can say honestly:

I don’t want to leave until I make amends for the crazy accusation that I seem to have made towards you.

Oh. my. god. Seriously? UGH

besides my many previous apologies

those weren’t apologies

If anybody who respect Prof. Dawkins is a monster to you then fine. We can mutually excommunicate each other and be done with it. But I don’t want to do that. Given that we cannot agree on everything in life, I still want to come together on this issue.

She didn’t fucking say that. She said your idol has sexism issues and you turn it around like she’s being all irrational calling Dawkins’ fans monsters. Caine makes sure to not call anyone monsters be it rapists or mass murders. Is your brain one big Bad Translator program?

Your “we can’t agree on everything on life…” way to dismiss and not even acknowledge any of the sexism issue Caine brings up.

This is why I kept warning you, getting the wording right in your apology to Caine was a BIG issue about your posts, but hardly the only thing wrong. And no, I’m not nit-picking just to be mean. Your words reveal more about you than you realize. I have major issues with the ingrained sexism and just how fucking stubborn you are about denying,dismissing, and ignoring it.

I hope you become exhausted, jacksul. It may possibly jolt you out of your self-absorption. You can’t do a straightforward apology to Caine they way you did with Tony because you still want to be the Idealistic Guy with Good Intentions Towards Women While Not Dealing with Them as People (Men). It may be that the only way you could avoid that is to apologize to Caine exactly as you did with Tony.

1)DO NOT mention what you were thinking or what you think Caine was thinking. You didn’t make such statements with Tony.

2) DO be specific and evidenced. You said Tony was trying to explain to you, and anyone looking at the exchange would say, “Okay, there’s evidence for that.” You said that he gave you points and referenced speakers. There’s evidence for that.

3) DO recognize what change in your behavior will cause you to be believed. You said “Tony: I’m sorry and I will…,” and it was a concrete action, not your initial intent, not your fee-fees.

It seems we could spend many exchanges on the points where we disagree, but I don’t think that is a good idea either.

Right…the fellow who believes he could talk to a neo-Nazi holocaust denier IF he was a skeptic. Why are you telling Caine you don’t think it would be a good idea to speak to her if you disagree? Is she not a skeptic? Is the too EMOTIONAL (silly woman)? You’re telling her that you’re WILLING to make her INVISIBLE to you again, fuckwit.

I really hoped that we could come together and be allies and maybe even friends eventually, but given your thoughts about Richard Dawkins who I do respect a great deal as an intellectual hero, that is sadly probably not possible

But your ok with cooperating with holocaust deniers and creationists? You have some seriously strange priorities.

If anybody who respect Prof. Dawkins is a monster to you then fine

Except she didn’t say that, nor was it implied.
I have no problem respecting Dawkins for his fine work in educating the public and his many good books. However, that doesn’t mean I’ll ignore it when he does something stupid, like the Dear Muslima thing and he does appear to have a particular blind spot on that issue. Just because the guy does good work in one area doesn’t mean he’s infallible or immune to criticism.

There are a few other outstanding points:
1) How sincere is an apology if you have to do major surgery to extract it?
2) How sincere is an apology, if the person turns around and says, “but I might do it again.”
3) I recognize there are a lot of posts to deal with, but it might be nice if you actually answered direct questions, especially if they’ve been asked repeatedly by multiple people. So, do you still think you’re owed an apology from myself and JAL and if so, for what?

Jacksul, why can’t you just shut the fuck up and leave? Every time you say something you embarrass yourself further, and show yourself to be dumb, deaf to what people say to you, and abjectly presuppositional and not skeptical. Being skeptical starts with the proper introspection, as you are the easiest person to be fooled by you. As any scientist will tell you.

The apology wouldn’t be honest. I can’t apologize for intentionally making an accusation, when I know that I did not intentionally make that accusation. It would be a non-pology like “I’m sorry my meaning was not clearly expressed by my poor choice of words.”

No one is asking you to apologize for your intentions! They are asking you to apologize for the actual words you wrote.

Past the first rule of holes? We’re dealing with someone who claims they would sit down and “make peace” with Mengele and Hovind if those two people parroted the right sounding sceptical noises. Someone who has struggled to distinguish between the intentions behind their actions and the effects of them. Someone who has yet to work out what an “accident” is.

This is not a bright person. Or if they are a bright person, they are working very, very, VERY hard not to be. I have a great deal of sympathy for the former. Not so much for the latter. We’re so far past the first rule of holes we’re now into the 19th rule of tunnels.

Louis

P.S. I am male and quite like Richard Dawkins. Even though, like any fallible human, he has made the odd cock up. Will that help?

Let me use some personal experience to try and enlighten you; My GF was raised in South Africa from the time she was a toddler until she was almost 20. She’s now been in the states for 13 years. When she first arrived here, the fact that blacks and whites actually, you know, interacted with each other was a huge culture shock. She was was basically raised to believe that blacks were subhuman.

Some of her older family members still think that way. It didn’t take her long however to become disabused of that notion. She has been struggling ever since to overcome that ingrained racism, and it’s not always easy. It was so heavily woven in to the context of her upbringing that she still occasionally finds herself thinking or feeling things that she knows she shouldn’t.

She gets a pass though from several of her current best friends who are black because they see this struggle, they know beyond a shadow of a doubt that she is earnestly trying, and that she’s getting better all the time. There is no question about her sincerity to want to change.

If you’re wondering what the hell this has to do with this thread and your treatment in it, then think about it.

Still don’t get it? The point is, we all have prejudices we have to overcome, some are blatant and out there, and some are more cleverly disguised. Your prejudice against women is more the latter, not completely obvious to anyone who isn’t well versed in the nefariousness of the patriarchy.

You appear new to this whole idea that women are subjugated in our society, and so you haven’t had that ah ha moment yet where your realize how this sexism is an underlying theme in your interactions here thus far. Caine and many others have tried patiently to explain it to you.

Right now, you are saying things that betray this sexism, this artifact of your upbringing. I get the sense that you probably don’t think so, but trust me, it’s there. Now you have an opportunity to go back and read this thread and seriously consider what’s been said to you, and opportunity to start to work on this and show and honest desire to change this aspect of your personality.

No one here will expect you to change overnight, everyone knows it’s not a light switch, but if you show a sincere effort, like my girlfriend has in dealing with her culturally ingrained racism, you will get a pass from the commentariat here, and even a great deal of support and help in getting there.

Trust me I’ve seen this play before, many times, but it starts with you doing some serious introspection, making a sincere apology to Caine and the other women you’ve offended, and expressing an honest desire to change. You will be a better person for it, a better skeptic. The ball is in your court.

jacksul: I was working towards a point by excising ‘intentionally’ and ‘accidentally’ from the sentences earlier. To refresh: remember this series?

I can’t apologize for intentionally making an accusation,

I apologize for accidentally making an accusation. I can definitely do that!

I apologize for making an accusation. (intentionality [sic] aside)

(You still had to stuff a mention of intent into the last one, but never mind for now.) Here’s the wider application: when you asked

Tony:
I don’t get it! Really. I issued many apologies to Caine. What were they missing?

that was the wrong question. It’s not what they’re missing; it’s what’s added in that doesn’t belong – specifically, all the INTENT-based explanations, qualifiers, and requests/demands that *she*, the (primary) wronged party, explain *to you* what you’re doing wrong so you can get out from it.

The point of apologizing is to acknowledge the other person that was hurt. To make a real apology, remove all the attempts to explain yourself, and focus just on acknowledging the wrong you did, the other person, and pledge to do better.

That’s the 101 version; it’s not necessarily going to be enough in this discussion, because you’ve gone on missing the point for so long. Another way to avoid making apologizing all about you is to give a short, excuse-free apology and then stop talking for a while and just listen. It’s also easier to learn that way, when you’ve put aside the burden of defending/excusing yourself.

—

Regarding some of your other points of confusion (and note, apology comes FIRST, this sort of discussion takes secondary priority) I suggest going back and reading Caine’s #252, where she excerpted Nice Guy 101 for you, and give it a little thought before posting again. It might look much more familiar now.

Being an ally is not a destination. It’s a process. Everyone fucks it up sometimes. I have made some spectacular fuckups myself, and that’s with trying to be very, very careful and aware. There is no get-out-of-jail-free card; there is no Magical Incantation.

…

It is a very sad fact that nine times out of ten, people with privilege, who are exercising that privilege in a way that makes other people feel uncomfortable, will not hear the fact that they are making other people uncomfortable until it’s pointed out to them by someone with the same privilege. They literally will not process what people are saying. It happens all the time, and it is so subtle and pervasive that people don’t see it even when someone calls them on it.

…

If you are ever, ever in a conversation about anything relating to gender expression, sexism, male/female relations, etc, and you catch yourself thinking, “She doesn’t understand, and I need to explain this to her,” stop. Walk away from the discussion (if it’s online) or shut your mouth (if it’s in person), and ask yourself: is it really that “she doesn’t understand”?

…

It’s okay to fuck up. I tell you three times. It’s going to be a painful process for you, because you are probably going to get your skin torn off in the immediate reaction, but if you shut up, listen, and actually process and engage with the truth being conveyed by that dogpile, you will be able to ameliorate the damage caused your fuckup — or at least not make it worse.

Do you want me to apologize for casting doubt on a rape? I know very well that I never doubted the rape. I never intended to cast doubt on the rape. The apology would be a lie.

(Even taking into account your apology in #499, you should still hear this.) There’s what you meant and then there’s what you did. No one is asking for an apology based on what you meant. In fact, multiple people have brought up how your intent is irrelevant. Apologizing for what you did, regardless of your intent, wouldn’t be a lie.

(#491)

I will trust people to give me the benefit of the doubt…

I’ve already covered how benefit of the doubt works around here up in 471. So have other people.

(#493)

I grew up in a sexist society. So of course it is still it is possible that some sexist ideas have crept in to my mind without me knowing. I don’t think that is what happened here, but it must happen sometimes. All we can do is try to purge such ideas from ourselves when and if we catch them.

It’s not “possible”; it’s inevitable. We’re cultural sponges. And because those sexist ideas creep in without our knowing, then it’s not “ourselves” who catch them; it’s the people we unwittingly inflict them upon who catch them. If you actually want to purge such ideas then you have to accept that the people around you act as a mirror that reflects your attitudes back at you with their outrage and take it to heart when they tell you that you’ve fucked up. Like here and now.

I really hoped that we could come together and be allies and maybe even friends eventually,

This ^ is a lie. A flat out, blatant lie. It’s a lie you tell yourself, to soothe your ego and continue your facade as the Nice Guy™. You aren’t a nice guy, jacksul. You’re an offensive sexist asshat who refuses to face up to their own privilege and biases in life. I do not want you as an ally. I do not want you as a friend. As it stands, I really wish you’d take a fast dive out of Pharyngula altogether, so I can at least go a day pretending you don’t exist. Why? Because you are the problem.

but given your thoughts about Richard Dawkins who I do respect a great deal as an intellectual hero, that is sadly probably not possible

Yes, I know he’s your hero. As I said, supra, some hero, eh? I have a bit of news for you, as you hide from reality all the time – Dawkins isn’t running about in tights and a cape, dear. He’s an elderly white man who rolls about in privilege and doesn’t much give a shit about the problems women face. Rather like you don’t give a shit about the problems women face. (Or those of men who have been raped.) You can’t even face up to the fact that people who do admirable work in one narrow area are people. People who come packaged with biases and fears and stupidity and blindness, just like everyone else. It’s not in the least bit admirable that Dawkins’ refused to face up to his sexism. I was there when countless people attempted to explain it to him, at his request. I was one of them. After all the explanations, he dug his heels in and handwaved it all away. You had best think why you admire that so much.

If anybody who respect Prof. Dawkins is a monster to you then fine

Thanks for confirming that your a sexist idiot who isn’t worth the time of day. I don’t other people, you fuckwitted pisscake. That would be you. It’s rather obvious you refuse to read a single thing I write, you just skim and run it through your sexist asshole translator and come out with more shit.

I don’t want an apology from you, jacksul. It would never be sincere, you’d never fucking get it and I don’t care. You aren’t the first person who has offended me and you certainly won’t be the last. I simply do not care about you. Someone else can attempt to rescue you from the fetid swamp you call home. You disgust me.

Also, jacksul, recently, Richard Dawkins stated that he thought teaching children about hell was much worse abuse than being molested. Think about that. He handwaved being raped or sexually assaulted as being minor compared to being taught about hell.

I think he only understands one of the two possibilities (and he is lucky to have that privilege).

Yes, he is. More than he knows. I hesitate to bring up my experience with being raped as a young child, because I do not want jacksul flipping the fuck out over that and doing a reset. However, as you know, Ogvorbis, and I know, the extent of that trauma is with you for the rest of your life. How in the fuck Dawkins’ thinks that can compare to the teaching of hell is beyond me. (And yes, I got the nasty hell concept taught to me, in spades. Old school catholic. They loved the idea of hell. It’s not worse. Not even close.)

I kinda lucked out in that I was raised in a relatively religion-free environment. My parents were Episcopalian (I was baptised Episcopalian) but were UUs by the time I was a toddler. And we lived in National Parks, so, other than the Mormon Monstrosity at Grand Canyon, there were very few churches. So, for me, no external hell via churches. I think I got the shit end of the stick.

I grew up in a sexist society. So of course it is still it is possible that some sexist ideas have crept in to my mind without me knowing.

It’s more than possible. If you don’t have any sexist ideas that crept into your mind without you knowing, you are probably the first person this has happened to since the invention of agriculture. I wonder what it is that’s preventing you from making leap from “It’s possible” to “it happened”.

I don’t think that is what happened here, but it must happen sometimes. All we can do is try to purge such ideas from ourselves when and if we catch them.

Here you have an instance where it clearly did happen. Your subconscious bias led you to perform a sexist action – attempting to render a vocal, outspoken victim of rape invisible and silent. People called you on it. Yet you still refuse to admit that this action of yours, which departed so completely from your alleged intentions, is evidence of subconscious sexist bias creeping in to influence your word choices.

You’re worthless as a skeptic.

Or, perhaps you’re really good at skepticism, except when it comes to women, sexism, and feminism.

If that were true, would you accept that–that is, your ability to apply skeptical principles to most topics, juxtaposed against your inability to apply skeptical principles to sexism–as evidence that sexist bias is affecting your actions?

If not, what evidence WOULD suffice as evidence that you have acted in a sexist way, regardless of your intentions?

jacksul: Caine did not say, or even imply, that anybody who respects Prof. Dawkins is a monster.

She pointed out to you that your idol—Prof. Dawkins—has feet of clay, where women/feminist issues are concerned. He is not some perfect template to model your behavior on. You need to realise that he is capable of error, thoughtless, hurtful error, based on his unconscious biases…and not imitate that behavior
-

I don’t think so, Erik. Jacksul seems to be highly invested in his image of a Nice Guy™ and True Skeptic™. It’s why he keeps coming back, trying to impress us some of us. (The ones with non-detachable penises.)

Even as a TF fan, I will easily admit that his last video is certainly full of quotemines and distortions. But I don’t think he is being intentionally dishonest. I think he is being lazy, and a dick, and insufficiently self-critical, and only seeing what he wants to see. We all have mountains of cognitive biases which is why we need science, but that is different from dishonesty.

The apology wouldn’t be honest. I can’t apologize for intentionally making an accusation, when I know that I did not intentionally make that accusation. It would be a non-pology like “I’m sorry my meaning was not clearly expressed by my poor choice of words.”

??? We’re mostly not asking you to apologize for thinking thoughts we don’t know if you thought. We’re asking you to apologize for saying what you actually said. “I’m sorry for phrasing it that way”. “I’m sorry for saying that”. See? Simple. When you step on someone’s foot, you don’t say “It’s not my fault your foot was in my way” unless you’re an asshole. You say “I’m sorry I stepped on your foot”. Dude, every apology is not a statement that reflects every facet of your self-worth, dignity, and interpretation of the absolute veracity of every aspect of the event. Apologies function as social lubricant. They function as a self-check to firmly plant it in your mind that “x” activity is one to be avoided. You do not have to carefully assign exactly which percentage of fault is yours for your phrasing and what percent is everyone else’s for interpreting it in the way such words are usually interpreted before you decide what level or kind of apology to offer.

So of course it is still it is possible that some sexist ideas have crept in to my mind without me knowing. I don’t think that is what happened here, but it must happen sometimes.

No ifs about it. If you’re interested, go read up on unpacking privilege and unconscious sexism. Both of those are phrases that google will help you with.

Your speech is so full of conditionals, jacksul. Did you get punished when you were young for speaking your mind? I’m honestly not trying to be snarky or mean, I mean it. Everything about the way you write makes it sound like you’re completely conflict-averse, completely responsibility-averse, that your main goal is for everyone to be happy and also for no one to be able to blame you for anything and to not to have to really commit to any specific ideas. It’s very much like what happens when you’re forced into being a mediator all the time without ever being able to learn properly how to be a mediator. “If” this, “if” that, all of your sentences are wrapped in layers of bubble wrap that cushions everyone involved from any consequences. Except that’s not how it works when there is a huge differential, when one side is objectively right and one side is objectively wrong and the wrong side is actively hurting the right side. Then the bubble wrap just suffocates the right side.